Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Materials that exhibit loss or gain have a complex-valued refractive index n. Nevertheless, when considering the propagation of optical pulses, using a complex n is generally inconvenient---hence the standard choice of real-valued refractive index, i.e., nₛ=Re(√n²). However, an analysis of pulse propagation based on the second-order wave equation shows that use of nₛ results in a wave vector different to that actually exhibited by the propagating pulse. In contrast, an alternative definition nc=√Re(n²), always correctly provides the wave vector of the pulse. Although for small loss the difference between the two is negligible, in other cases it is significant; it follows that phase and group velocities are also altered. This result has implications for the description of pulse propagation in near resonant situations, such as those typical of metamaterials with negative (or otherwise exotic) refractive indices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paul Kinsler (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: